Re: UNDO and in-place update - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tsunakawa, Takayuki
Subject Re: UNDO and in-place update
Date
Msg-id 0A3221C70F24FB45833433255569204D1F65AA15@G01JPEXMBYT05
Whole thread Raw
In response to UNDO and in-place update  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: UNDO and in-place update  (Peter Geoghegan <pg@heroku.com>)
Re: UNDO and in-place update  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
IMHO, overall, there should be pros and cons of the current approach and the new UNDo one (like Oracle?), depending on
theworkload.  Under update-heavy workload, the UNDO method may be better.  OTOH, under the mostly-INSERT workload (like
datawarehouse?), the current method will be better because it writes no log for UNDO.
 

Furthermore, it maybe the best to be able to switch the method for each table and/or tablespace.  For example, in
pgbench,history table uses the current method,
 
and other tables use the UNDO method.  Is it time to introduce a pluggable storage system?

Because PostgreSQL is a follower in the UNDO approach, I think it will be better to study other DBMSs well (Oracle and
MySQL?). That includes not only their manuals, but also whitepapers and books.  Especially, I expect good books to give
deepknowledge on performance tuning and troubleshooting, from which we will be able to know the cons that Oracle's
materialsdon't state.
 

Regards
Takayuki Tsunakawa






pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Amit Kapila
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [bug fix] Cascading standby cannot catch up and get stuck emitting the same message repeatedly
Next
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: UNDO and in-place update